On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Eric Anholt <e...@anholt.net> wrote: > Here's a series I got built when profiling to see why glamor's FBO cache > is necessary. It turns out the worst spots in the no-cache profile were > present even with the cache, and they were about walking the 96 texture > units we've got these days. Thanks to Chris Forbes's > _MaxEnabledTexImageUnit, I now found a way to cut down how much we walk, > for a big performance win: -6.50518% +/- 2.55601% effect on runtime of the > test (n=22). And, along the way, I got to kill a couple of bitfields that > I've always found confusing, and I bet others have as well. > > There's still a similar problem with glDeleteTextures() though -- if i > don't use the FBO cache, then we spend 5% of CPU walking the array then. > Anyone have nice ideas for improving that? I'm thinking of just having a > _MaxBoundTexImageUnit, but maybe there's something better.
I'm not really familiar with the code, so I only feel comfortable giving R-b for 1-12 after a single pass. 1-12 are: Reviewed-by: Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
